47,114 ×
thank you · danke · merci · tak · gracias · grazie · благодаря́ · dziękuję · bedankt · obrigado · ευχαριστώ · köszönöm · mulțumesc · kiitos · poďakovať · hvala

Take action now

47114 have taken action

Read our privacy policy.**

Read more about your participation in this public consultation. 

I agree with the above privacy policy. My data will be stored for the duration of this campaign. I give my permission to create an EU Login account on my behalf in order to participate in the EU consultation. I am aware that my data given here will be transferred to and managed by the European Commission for the public consultation. I allow the European Commission to publish my reply.
Please fill in all fields
Please check your email address
Please enter a feedback of at least 150 charachters.
You have already participated
Oops, something went wrong. Please refresh or try again later.

Thank you for making your submission to #StopFakeGreen

Share now on social media and by email to triple your impact

Time to Stop Fake Green


Currently, bankers are free to define what is 'green', leading to fossil fuels, dirty transport, bad farming & pesticides being labelled as environmentally sustainable. 

But now we have the chance to participate in the public consultation to fix the European law that defines what is 'green'. 

By signing this appeal you agree to send the text below to the European Commission and to attach the analysis of the technical experts from the not for profit sector. 

You can read the NGO appeal here and the technical analysis here.



Dear President von der Leyen 

Executive Vice President Dombrovskis 

Executive Vice President Timmermans  

Commissioner McGuinness


I support the European Commission’s initiative to stop greenwashing in the financial industry and in the economy, and I welcome the effort to devise science-based criteria for what is to be considered a ‘green investment’.


In its proposal to classify investments, the Commission has, commendably, endorsed the 100 gCO2/KWh limit for energy production. Therefore fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas won’t be considered sustainable as they all produce emissions above this threshold. If you weaken this standard because of the heavy pressure from the industry, you will bring the entire taxonomy into disrepute and contradict the EU's own 2050 climate law. In fact, the Commission’s criteria should include thresholds that tighten at least every five years in order to decline to zero by 2050, as the experts recommend.


I also believe the following changes are urgently required:

• The criteria on bioenergy are far too weak and will encourage things that increase emissions compared to fossil fuels, for example burning trees and crops;

• Animal farming needs to be re-examined and should be excluded for now, as the current standards do little to address the many issues with the sector;

• Sea and coastal transport for passengers and goods have been introduced with no expert oversight or stakeholder consultation. The standards proposed are not environmentally sustainable. These sections need to be withdrawn altogether and addressed in the appropriate expert group.


The burning of trees and crops for energy, factory animal farming, polluting cargo and cruise liners significantly damage our planet and people’s health, and should not be featured in the list of ‘green’ activities. 


On top of these issues, I would like to highlight a number of other issues raised by environmental experts from civil society on forestry, hydropower, manufacturing and transport. Please find attached the recommendations of these experts who, free of any conflict of interest, have nothing but the health of the planet and its people at heart.


Please do take heed of their concerns and of the voices of the people of Europe.